index_status

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It explains the tool returns metadata about the index, implying a read-only operation. It does not disclose edge cases (e.g., missing path), but for a simple inspection tool, the provided information about outputs suffices.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: the first states the core action, the second lists what it reveals. Every sentence is essential and front-loaded. No repetition or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, usage timing, and output content. It could mention error behavior for invalid sources, but the main use case is well explained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant parameter details beyond the schema—it focuses on outputs. Thus, no extra value, but also no missing information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Inspect') and resource ('active index for a local path or Git repository'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'search' and 'list_files' by focusing on index metadata rather than content.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use it: 'before searching.' It lists the discoverable items (selected source, caching, counts, languages, tools), providing clear context. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.